ArticlePloS one2024
Utility index and vision-related quality of life in patients awaiting specialist eye care.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Correlation between quality of vision and clinical and structural parameters in patients with Autosomal Dominant Optic Atrophy.Eye (London, England) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to ascertain utility and vision-related quality of life in patients awaiting access to specialist eye care. A secondary aim was to evaluate the association of utility indices with demographic profile and waiting time.
methodsConsecutive patients that had been waiting for ophthalmology care answered the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-25). The questionnaire was administered when patients arrived at the clinics for their first visit. We derived a utility index (VFQ-UI) from the patients' responses, then calculated the correlation between this index and waiting time and compared utility across demographic subgroups stratified by age, sex, and care setting.
results536 individuals participated in the study (mean age 52.9±16.6 years; 370 women, 69% women). The median utility index was 0.85 (interquartile range [IQR] 0.70-0.92; minimum 0.40, maximum 0.97). The mean VFQ-25 score was 70.88±14.59. Utility correlated weakly and nonsignificantly with waiting time (-0.05, P = 0.24). It did not vary across age groups (P = 0.85) or care settings (P = 0.77). Utility was significantly lower for women (0.84, IQR 0.70-0.92) than men (0.87, IQR 0.73-0.93, P = 0.03), but the magnitude of this difference was small (Cohen's d = 0.13).
conclusionPatients awaiting access to ophthalmology care had a utility index of 0.85 on a scale of 0 to 1. This measurement was not previously reported in the literature. Utility measures can provide insight into patients' perspectives and support economic health analyses and inform health policies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.